Search results

I'm still wondering about the early Mustang mounts instead of the later. www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?threads/poly-tranny-mount-for-5-0.427816/ Last year sometime there was a tranny mount thread and I posted this link for the 3rd time and it finally started a small conversation on...

Sounds like it's cranking but not starting. I wish people all used the same terms. It also sounds like a weak pump, i'd replace it.

Wow that's a lot of drama. That's why I do mine in my garage on jack stands in like an hour and I know it's done right.

You guys are funny, if you didn't own it from new you have no idea if a part is factory or not. It doesn't matter if it had 15 pumps in it till that one went. It doesn't change the story one bit. And for the '' I can't imagine how difficult it would have been doing it on jackstands.'' You do...

I used the Flowmaster universal 3'' kit, well 2 of them on my big block Bronco. The kit is well thought out and gave me 2 choises for exits which once you choose you have more pipe to play with.

No, my set for my 98 came Had 4 with heat shields. The tubular and iron manifolds use different wires. The rear 2 cylinders on each side used the shields.

I like these more than the factory wires, the only wires I'll buy anymore. Spark Plug Wire Set - Premium

I'll just stick this here. Those Typhoons were badass.

Yes, you'll need a 4406....so I guess that's a no unless you remove the front driveshaft.

I'm saying there were no convertible Cobras back then.

93 Cobras were all 3 door hatchbacks.....just saying.

So did you get the lower arch or higher arch? And how does it compare to the stock springs?

It was an option I'm told so you'll be fine.

Sounds like you found your problem. My old Bronco has a C-6 with 250,000 at least on it and the valve body bores wore enough to make every edge sharp and the valves would stick.

The correct answer is 35s and 4.56....lol

You are right on with the hurting efficiency remark but what I was getting at was IF you went to 31s some 4.10 gears would bring your cruse RPM right back to stock. I rarely seem to get my point across online...lol Now is it worth the cost to re gear 2 rears for a 1/4 of a ratio....not to me...

I took them out at 130,000 miles and my tranny guy said they looked like new. The math might look good on paper but in a much lighter Mustang with little tires they were awful. IMO it would be like having a fully loaded trailer hooked to an EX all the time when pulling out. You are correct, it...

I took them out at 130,000 miles and my tranny guy said they looked like new. The math might look good on paper but in a much lighter Mustang with little tires they were awful. IMO it would be like having a fully loaded trailer hooked to an EX all the time when pulling out.

I just went from stock tires to 31s and That did about the same thing as if I dropped my 3.73 for 3.55. My cruise RPM went from 2200 Down to about 2050. Time to go tire shopping.

Unless you have seen this done and like it I would rethink the close ratio swap. My 94 GT (AODE) had the planetarys you are talking about And it was a TURD to drive around town. I went from 2.73 gears to 3.55 then to 3.90s and still was unhappy with it. Then I did the wide ratio swap and all...

It wouldn't take much metal work to get the 6x9 in.

I agree but also the rear main seal should b leaking by now too.

Here's what I did. http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?threads/my-98-xlt-5-0-finally-goes-under-the-knife.429627/

If you want low gearing you don't want a 205. My 4406 in my EX Feels like it has an extra low compared to my 205.

There are 2 pictures of my drive shafts in this thread. You can compare that front one to my rear Expedition shaft. http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?threads/junk-yard-finds-for-my-ex.424333/

If I come across it I'll measure but from what to what am I measuring? Maybe weld to weld on the long piece.

Yes it does. The truck I got my 4406 from had a 4R70W tranny and a 4.6 and a front drive shaft so I grabbed the DS while getting the 4406. So there goes your theory I guess.

That's not true from every thread I ever seen .

I don't know the numbers but the Mazda wheels measured the same as the factory EX wheels.

Looking better!

A Link would be nice but I think I seen that before.

Sweet! Maybe post a few straight on pics too.

Ford really didn't change tranny mounts much in 50 years for the most part. The tranny mount in my 79 Bronco which is a C6 is the same as the 79-98 Mustang mount. If the early mounts are thinner then an EX mount that would be great since no cross member mods are needed and a simple spacer plate...

I was just asking a simple question as to why I see guys using 79-98 Mustang mounts when the early mounts are more the correct size...that's all. Of course anything can be made to work but in your one post you said ''use the 79-93 fox mount'' which is really 79-98 so that's why I asked why. I...

Exactly! I'm thinking the early mount has to be thee way to go.

I'm all for modding the cross member to make a Mustang mount work BUT why wouldn't a lower or thinner mount be better? Even in that thread you linked you show how much you had to hack out of the cross member to make the newer mount fit. The earlier mount will bolt up to the tranny just like the...

I have used them as well, they are a stock type gasket like I described above. Any metal gasket with rubber ribs will seal and not warp the pan since the bolts cant sink into it.

But if the height is closer that would be better right?

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/index.php?search/12562368/

The best gaskets for pans and valve covers are the stock type that are steel with some rubber beads on both sides. My 94 Mustang still has the factory gaskets and they have been reused maybe a dozen times in it's 190,000 miles with no leaks.